Not one without the other

Recently over a dinner conversation with a friend, we talked about an issue that bothered me greatly. We were talking about the growing number of bloggers in Singapore that used the relative freedom in cyberspace to talk and discuss about various issues in Singapore that people were concerned about. She had a view about these bloggers which offended me greatly, in no small part due to my own involvement in this community I must admit. Her view, which I reckon is one that many other Singaporeans have, is that she does not see any point or relevance in the discussions and views expressed on the blogosphere in Singapore. In a way, she sees most of what was written and talked about in the blogs as just hot air, hollow rhetoric without any real commitment or passion behind the words. Simply put, she thinks it's just empty talk, nothing more.

Over the past few weeks, there had been others that had expressed varying versions of my friend's view over the national media. We had some Singaporeans and even a Canadian accusing Singaporean bloggers of ingratitude. An insightful post by the LuckySingaporean correctly pointed out the erroneous conclusion that these people had drawn on the blogging community. The post explained that criticism of the current government do not equate ingratitude towards our nation's forefathers. In fact, the blogosphere provided some form of a check-&-balance mechanism for our political and fiscal process to focus more attention on providing for the earlier generations that made Singapore what it is today. Please take a minute or two to read the link to the post.

I think there is a very fundamental misconception which both my friend and the above mentioned prosecutors had made in their views. They had wrongly assumed that all the criticism published within the blogs belonged to people that were disadvantaged by the prevailing system. Such people seek to reap more benefits for themselves by chastising the incumbent administration and any suggestions of an overhaul of the current system were but attempts by such folk to rebalance the distribution of power and wealth for their benefit. While that may be true for some blogs, it is generally not the case for many others.

At least in my opinion, many of the issues discussed within the blogs do not immediately concern the bloggers themselves. It is out of a sense of justice, fairness and civic duty that they expressed their views so honestly and passionately. For many of us, the intention behind the words is pure and we do not have a personal agenda to say what we say. There is nothing to gain through the expression of our thoughts except the satisfaction that we helped spark some awareness amongst the unknowingly public about issues that are important and hopefully, in some small and personal way, help make Singapore a better place.

To try to effect some changes in society through any violent or disruptive means is not the Singaporean way. We thrived over the last 40 years as a nation in no small part due to the stability and rationality of our system and people. Aside of the mad rush during condo sales, there is generally no mob mentality on our tiny island. Singaporeans appreciate reasonableness, civility and persuasiveness and I am no exception. I think ranting political insults during dramatic and willful demonstrations of public defiance is an ineffective method to effect changes in society, especially within the Singapore context. We should try instead to encourage changes through open discussions and reasonable persuasion. If that should be the preferred method of engaging the leaders, what better way to do that then through the blogs? It may be a small step but it is also the first step, a most important one. While the blogging community, especially bloggers that blogs about social and political issues, have a duty to be responsible with their words and reasonable with their opinions, to dismiss the bloggers as a bunch of disenchanted, misguided ingrates is akin to stamping out any initiative for progress before any real change can happen. What are the chances for the youths of today to want to engage society and make a real difference if the first thing we do is to slam the door in their faces and dismiss their intentions the moment they try to express an alternative view.

Unthinking obedience is not a criterion for patriotism. Similarly, disagreement does not amount to treason. We write and critique on the affairs in Singapore because we care. Behind the sometimes fierce and passionate rhetoric on the disappointment with our current system, lies a love and pride for the country, our home which we hope to change for the better. It is far easier to agree and comply with the current state, and disregard the plights of other fellow Singaporeans as long as it does not concern one-self. It is easy to go quietly into the night and not make a sound when things are not important to you. Else, I believe if you truly care about something, you cannot simultaneously be concerned yet quietly indifferent about it. The criticism and patriotism stems from the same place and you cannot have one without the other.